Nope, there are still set guildlines to allow society to run smoothly. Laws are placed to make sure order throughout the lands.

Throughout history the idea of a pedo would be laughed at if this was the 12 century or before that due to the age of concent and marrige was like 11 due to the shortened life spans. Due to the current age we ive in, children are not forced into marriage in a young age meaning their youth and innocence should be preserved as long as possible, of course up to a certain age it is up to the individual to concent to sexual activities, that age is 16 btw at least in Florida.

Rape is something that is also something that society has also molded as a way to protect people from unwanted sexual activity. Remember that back in the day pillaging and rape was as common as television is today. It is not right in the corrent society that they have the free rights to do as they please. Meaning that both males and females are protected from these acts and both genders have to concent to the activities.

So all in all, no they have no right. Society evolved farther then those barbaric times. If we were discussing this back in the 12th century then yes, 21st century, hell no.

You haven't read my point thoroughly enough , the peadophile or the rapist is not my point , I was only using them to demosntrate the consequential nature of true "freedom"

I haven't shown any hate towards homosexual people , I will admit I have a severe dislike for homosexuality however. I love homosexual people as I do every other person  and to hate some one simply because of who they where and how they were would contradict everythign I believe in.

There is morality without G-d.  Without laws there is anarchy.  We need laws.  These don't need to be inspired by G-d.  People form groups and establish a government larger than themselves to handle the things they can't on their own: police, courts, firemen, etc., so they can be safe from the crazies.  In fact, that's the entire purpose of government.

Governments don't pick one religion and do whatever it says.  If you combine religious/moral authority with the law, suddenly sinning gets the death penalty.

What was the point of your soccer analogy?  We make rules to minimize the amount of time the ball is in the river so people can enjoy the game.  So what?  It's just like we make rules about rape and murder to minimize the amount of rape and murder so people can be safe and enjoy life.

I've always hated the argument about homosexual marriages ruining "the sanctity of marriage" as though straight marriages are so sanctimonious. When a straight couple can get married in Las Vegas after just meeting each other, get divorced after they find out how dumb their decision was, and yet at no point is their marriage question on a legal basis, and they get all the tax breaks coming to them, then there is no sanctity of marriage. Why hold gay people up to a higher standard for marrying one another then we hold ourselves?

Million, read this, please:

Stop comparing gays and pedophiles/rapists.

I get your "point" about "true freedom." You think that without religious laws imposing on our freedoms, we have to allow everything, even rape and murder.

HERE IS THE DIFFERENCE:

Rape hurts victims.
Homosexuality does not.

Do you see the difference?

We allow one because it is victimless. We don't allow the other because it has victims.

Nobody is arguing for "absolute freedom" in the sense that you're talking about, allowing murder and rape and molestation. Nobody has argued this.

THAT IS THE STRAW MAN YOU BUILT BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY ARGUMENT YOU KNOW HOW TO FIGHT.

Outside of that, you're not really discussing any of our points about law, history, or morality.

Alright this will most definetley be my last post in this thread I will absolutley not reply under 99% of conditons (lol)

"Nope, there are still set guildlines to allow society to run smoothly. Laws are placed to make sure order throughout the lands."

WHERE ARE THESE GUILDLINES COMING FROM ? I don't think you'd believe in god so you'd have to  accept that these "guidlines" were made purley through human thought , like you yourself admited , there is nothing predifined so you WOULD HAVE TO AGREE with me when I say the pedophile or the rapist is equally just when they say what they do is good. these guidlines you talk about would only be valid as real morale if they pre-defined by a objective being , however this isn't the case.

"So all in all, no they have no right. Society evolved farther then those barbaric times. If we were discussing this back in the 12th century then yes, 21st century, hell no."

Again who are you to say what is "right" you've admited there is nothing pre-defined "There is no prestated or written book that truly stated what each and everyone is allowed or free to do because that would be taking away individual rights." For you to deny the rapist his right to rape would be limiting his individual rights in the same way as denying the homosexual his right to be homosexual YOU CANNOT HAVE ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER.

My point has absolutley nothing to do with peadophiles or rapists i understand that it's different because people aren't getting hurt in both situations but what you must understand is that by you deciding that an individual being hurt is a wrong thing your are imposing your values upon another consequently limiting their civil liberty no matter how disgusting , obscene , vile , evile , degrading it is.it's more the principle of accepting freedom when it's convienient for you and then limiting it at the point where it affects you in a way you dislike , by definiton that is not FREEDOM! You must accept the rapist as you do the homosexual otherwise you contradict yourself.

My main motivation for carrying on is my love for debate and furthering my understanding ( owning people is also enjoyable)  , please don't get the impression that i'm some kinda homophobic nazi skinhead because i'd rather this thread never be created if that's how you would view me , the purpose of this thread is purley to encourage thought provoking debate , for us to broaden and develop our minds as a community.

I do love homosexuals (not in that way) but I do truly love them.

Actually the people did read and understand what you were trying to say based on how they responded. What you were trying to say didn't make sense in any context. The reason you haven't been able to respond to anything constructively is because your train of logic started out derailed. It's an intellectually dishonest argument. Using the strawman yobo equivalent of Aquinas to battle a hooligan-like caricature of Sartre isn't anything new. The tatty version of Kant is still superior.

ROFLCOPTERS AHOY.

Wait, so your argument is that we can't make our own laws?

It's either:

A) We get laws from an objective authority (in this case, a super being).

or

B) We can't have any laws because they'd make us hypocrites because we'd want to disallow things that hurt and allow things that don't?

Why not allow:

C) We make laws against things that hurt. We allow everything else.

?

Even thought there arre no pre-determined guidelines society is based on the majority thought. Society is meant to be protected, each individual to keep their civil liberties within the thought of the majority. It doesnt matter if you accept one or both as right or wrong. It is a matter of how things fall into place within society's eyes.

It is a matter of each and everyone's values and morals. All roads will always lead to this. Society is based on ever changing and evolving values and morals. This is why 50 years ago a homosexual would probably be hung. Now they can stand proudly without, much, fear.

Everyone is brought up a certain way and taught to think a certain way. No matter where you live, who your parents or guardians are, what faith you follow, we all are impacted a certain way by our environment. Like I previously said, it is a matter of when and what time period you look at. The think is not to judge but understand what and why things were happening.

This is why society plays a key role in what happens. Society gives balance to the world. It cannot take away individual free will or thought. It can make it so that things in the past that made sense at that time doesnt repeat itself due to it not fitting how we as humans in this age live.

This might not have been the best online discussion that I have been in, on these subjects and more contriversial, but still entertaining to share beliefs and knowledge.